Israel, Hamas, and Just War Theory
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 окт 2023
- Jeffrey K. Mann, Professor of Religious Studies at Susquehanna University, offers a very quick assessment of the recent violence in Israel/Palestine through the lens of Just War Theory.
Thanks for the quick re-familiarization about the principles of just war theory, Dr. Mann. Good conceptual framework laid out here
Thank you!
Fire explanation
I know what that means!
Are you familiar with Jeff McMahan's critique of classical just war theory? His book, Killing in War, goes in depth on it.
Yes, I have. It's a very good critique. In fact, I cited him in my book on the subject. With regard to soldiers not fighting in wars of which they doubt the justice, "McMahan argues strongly for this position in , and his examination of this tricky matter is essential reading. Even if one is not fully convinced, his analysis of this ethical dilemma is comprehensive and his argument compelling."
There are indeed certainly serious challenges to Just War Theory.
Thank you for your comment.
The falacy of Hamas is that they have no justifiable claim to "proper authority." Therefore it is not a "just war" accordig to the just war paradime.
If Hamas was elected by the Palestinian people in a fair election, they would have Proper Authority, as Just War Theory defines it, regardless of how despicable they are. If the election were not fair, then you're right.
Thank you for your comment!
Is this a satire to show Just War Theory is simply vague and useless in real war?
Who decides what a ‘proper’ authority is? ‘Proper,’ ‘Just’ and ‘Right’ and subjective. Might as well have listed the conditions to Just War as ‘Strong Force’, ‘Enough Motivation or Hate’, ‘Mighty Rewards’. Because all three applies to Israel!
My view on war aligns with that of the Islamic narrative, which stipulates the prohibition of engaging conflict with non-combatants, women, children, religious scholars as well as the destruction of religious places (regardless of the religion). In addition to the immediate concession of peace when the enemy asks for it.
I argue this view on war is more objective and would have benefitted both sides of the conflict and reduced civilian deaths.
It's a 3 minute video. Sorry I didn't exactly capture all of Just War Theory in that time. :)
If you look at the history of JWT in figures like Thomas Aquinas and Hugo Grotius, you'll find some of the answers to the questions you're asking, e.g. definitions of "proper authority."
However, you're right. JWT is not perfectly precise. There is certainly room for subjective interpretation and manipulation. At the very least, however, it gives us a vocabulary to talk about the ethics of war. And it does establish some rules that are pretty clear.
In fact, if you look at early Arab rules on the ethics of warfare, picked up by Islam, you will find a lot of similarities. The prohibitions on killing non-combants, etc., that you referred to are also found in JWT's treatment of "Discrimination."
Re. immediate concession of peace when the enemy asks for it... I can see some problems there.
Thank you for the conversation.